Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

workers are an underclass?

238 replies

soggy14 · 05/12/2010 12:40

Does anyone else feel that we are heading into a society where anyone working is becoming a poor underclass whilst the "well off" are those on benefits? Okay not as bad but approaching the Downton Abbey type senario where those of us in paid employment are downstairs and (some of) those on benefits upstairs.

And yes I know that some people on benefits need them and genuinely cannot work but many I think do not need them. And I know that I will now get flamed by hundreds shouting that they are struggling on benefits :) but we are struggling on our incomes but also need to work all the time and seem to be worse off than those doing nothing yet are having to support them :(

OP posts:
FunnysInTheGarden · 05/12/2010 12:44

Is your name Julia? There seems to be a bit of a run of these lately.

Of course YABU

Nancy66 · 05/12/2010 12:45

Errr, no I don't think that.

I don't know anyone on benefits that lives on a country estate with 20 servants.

sarah293 · 05/12/2010 12:46

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

MerrilyDefective · 05/12/2010 12:47
Biscuit
DooinMeCleanin · 05/12/2010 12:47

Leave your job then if you think the alternative is a better way of living. Let one of the ungratefull scroungers have your job.

violethill · 05/12/2010 12:49

Oooh do you have a death wish?!

OK - to answer you seriously. I don't think it's the case that those in paid employment are an 'underclass'. I do know it's true that for many people in paid employment, there is very little immediate financial gain, and in the short term, they can be no better off than being on benefits.

However..... change is already on its way. The welfare system became so awkward and clumsy and so far removed from its original purpose. That's why it is being reformed, and the Government's big agenda is to make work pay.

Plus... benefits are a short term fix. They don't provide long term security. Paid employment means you can pay into a pension, so you have the chance to get a decent amount to live on later on, as well as the fairly basic state pension. If you don't own your own home, you won't have it to pass on to your children. If you don't have savings (remember, once you're over a certain amount, it affects your benefits) then ditto - you have nothing to fall back on and nothing for your kids to inherit (or to spend on yourself!)

Plus there are all the other advantages of working, apart from financial. People in work tend to be more stimulated, happy, have more of a social network....less depression etc

MerrilyDefective · 05/12/2010 12:52

Because of course it's really easy to get benefits.
You just go in and DEMAND them and the benefit officers just cave in and give you everything you want.
Holidays/new cars/shiny nice houses/even servants to wait on you.
YABU and are ill informed.

thegrudge · 05/12/2010 12:52

I don't.

If I did maybe I would stop working and live of benefits.

I like the security that home ownership and a pension scheme brings.

I don't think that there are swathes of people living the high life on benefits. I think most people on benefits would rather work. Most households have at least one person working. Household without a working adult on a permenant basis are rare.

The bulk of the welfare bill is state pensions, JSA isn't that much and I do use most of the things that I am paying towards ie health, education, refuse collection, highways etc. so it would be a bit OTT to begrudge the tiny amount that goes on benefits for the tiny minority of won't work unemployed people.

TheCoalitionNeedsYou · 05/12/2010 12:54

No.

curlymama · 05/12/2010 12:55

People on benefits are not 'well off', although it does often seem that way when people can claim lots of different benefits.

You have a point, and whether people want to flame you or not (which they will) the simple fact is that there are lots of people on benefits that are much better off than those on low paid jobs. They don't have the expense of working, travel costs etc, but they have the same or a slightly highter income. That is fucked up, and I hope this government manages to sort that out.

DooinMeCleanin · 05/12/2010 12:59

curlymama I have been in both positions very recently. I can guarentee you people on benefits are not better off. Not if they have the luxery of owning property, anyway. Dunno about you, but the thought of losing my house was terrifying to me.

Original poster
soggy14 · 05/12/2010 13:03

Merrily I'm not saying that it is easy to get on benefits - it isn't. We are at the stage of thinking that we would be better off if we could give up our jobs and go on benefits but we cannot. We feel like we have missed the boat and stupidly worked hard and got jobs. dh is a higher rate tax payer so now we also loseour child benefit. We are cold, we cannot afford nice food and we are struggling to afford any presents for the children yet dh works stupidly long hours (from home, in fingerless gloves so that he can type without his hands going numb) whilst I sit beside him also working from home with two hot water bottles as we can't afford to turn the heating on for more than a couple of hours a day mainly because our mortgage is so high. However we cannot get social housing (as we work) and rents are even higher.
We are not in low paid work but we do not have rich parents who are happy to sub us so we have had to pay for our house deposit and mortage all on our own which these days is prohibitably expensive.

OP posts:
usualsuspect · 05/12/2010 13:06

Poor you

curlymama · 05/12/2010 13:06

But that's your case, and yours only. There are cases where people are better off on benefits.

Not all jobs have security or pay enough for someone to get their own house. Not all jobs pay enough for people to be able to afford to pay into a pension or savings account.

Someone living in HA accommodation does have security for the rest of their lives about where they are going to live. They can pass that house straight onto their children if they still live with them.

Someone in a low paid job may have managed to get a mortgage, but could be strugging to pay that every month, and worry what wil happen if they lose their job. If they do lose their job, losing their home is a very real and scary risk. If they are lucky enough to have paid off that home when that die, their children who may still be living there get turfed out to pay the tax. Any savings may have to be spent on exactly the same care that someone on benefits would get for free.

DooinMeCleanin · 05/12/2010 13:07

If your DH is higher earner and you are struggling, you need to re-evaluate your prioities.

What's the betting you have a house that I Dh and I could only ever dream of owning and a massive mortgage to boot? Fancy car?

Nancy66 · 05/12/2010 13:07

so your husband earns - what? £50k a year?

How much is your mortgage?

CardyMow · 05/12/2010 13:07

But the benefits are at a 'subsistance' level, so surely it should be the wages of the low-aid workers that rise, NOT the benefits of the out-of-work that drop?

While being in the low-paid workers situation, I can see what you are saying, Curlymama, but having also been on benefits - I can safely say that the income you have on benefits is SHIT. It isn't the fault of those out of work that lots of people IN work are paid crappy wages.

And capitalism and the free market as a whole is dependant on there being a ercentage of people out of work, as otherwise no-one would be able to set up a business and get employees as everyone would already have a job, and also it keeps the wage bill down as the lowest paid workers can't do very much about their shitty wages as there are thousands of others waiting to HAVE that low paid job.

It's the business owners and the government colluding to keep wages low that kees a certain percentage of people unemployed, as otherwise the capitalist, free market model of our society would break down.

My opinion is that neither socialism NOR capitalism on their own are sustainable ways to run a country, you would need to take the best parts of both to create an ideal society where everyone works for their money and everyone can survive on their income. But we don't live in Utopia, we live in the real world, and blaming all the ills of British society on people on Jobseekers allowance or Income support is just glossing over the real issues of minimum wage not being enough to support a family on in our economy now.

mrsscoob · 05/12/2010 13:11

I am actually laughing out loud, what planet are you on!!!

MissAnneElk · 05/12/2010 13:12

If your DH is paying higher rate tax and you are also earning you are nowhere near the bread line. It sounds as though your mortgage is too expensive. Can you honestly say that you can't down size? Or move to a cheaper area?

MerrilyDefective · 05/12/2010 13:13

So jack in your jobs,lose your house and go into private rental.
After a long time on the waiting lists you MAY get social housing.
Get repossessed and put in temporary accommodation (this can be for up to 2 years).
After the 2 years you will probably be given social housing but with no choice in where it is.
Therefore it is quite likely you will have to change your childrens schools as you will be too far away to get there.

If you DP is in the higher tax rate and you also work then why can't you afford heating,food etc?

Most of us don't have rich parents who are happy to sub us,and most of us pay our own rent/mortgages because we are grown ups and that's what grown ups do.

DrNortherner · 05/12/2010 13:14

YABVU.

Life on benefits is not the bed of roses the Daily Mail paints it to be.

Often, people who 'struggle' on 2 wages run 2 cars, holiday overseas and have flt screen TV's.....

violethill · 05/12/2010 13:14

It's about outgoings, not just income.

If you are paying childcare for preschool children (1000k per month per child) plus a mortgage/rent, plus council tax, plus utilities, plus food, plus dentist, prescriptions etc..... if you really think that everyone on a decent income has it easy, then you're as blinkered as people who think everyone on benefits is living the high life.

We were both working in professional careers when our children were tiny, and I can assure you, we came very close to losing our house, and we certainly spent years without any luxuries, holidays, meals out.

Why? Because we couldn't afford to live on one income. And earning two incomes meant spending almost the equivalent of one on childcare. There are many other supposedly 'high' or 'middle' earners in the same boat. It's bloody hard. And often when you are both working, it means running two cars (insurance, petrol, tax....) or spending an arm and a leg on public transport.

curlymama · 05/12/2010 13:15

Agree completely with you there Loudlass, that was very well said.

I don't blame the people on benefits, if I needed them and could get them, of course I would. But I can see why someone in a situation like Soggys would feel quite upset with the situation the way it is.

Minimum wage is definately not enough, maybe the government should be subsidizing that rather than giving out benefits quite so much. There should be a limit to how much anyone can recieve on benefits, regardless of the number of children.

The small company I work for (a nursery) simply couldn't afford to pay me anymore, it would go bust if it did.

thegrudge · 05/12/2010 13:17

It doesn't follow that you buying a house you can't afford to pay for means people on benefits are an overclass. It just mean you are living beyond your considerable means.

Its normal for home owners to have a mortgage and have paid their own deposit. I don't know a single person whose parents has stumped up a deposit for them.

Original poster
soggy14 · 05/12/2010 13:18

DooinMe - take someone earning £50K. After tax and NI and health and pension you take home just over half that - ie just over £2K a month.
Our mortgage is £200K (not that high when you consider that we live in the south after having to move here for work after dh got made redundant up north - his main office is now closed which is why he is at home but we still need to live in the south as he keeps having to go to London to the office there). Average house price is about £250K round here (for nothing special - ie 3 bed semi with no gas or drainage - ones in the towns cost more) and we have only recently bought after saving the deposit so most of mortgage is still owing. So we pay £1300 a month mortgage, plus £130 council tax, £80 electric, about £100 for heating (at 2 -3 hours a day) and hot water (no gas so need to use oil) plus water rates and septic tank maintenwance contract (about another £100 a month). Plus petrol, car tax etc (no buses and need to get the kids to school). Not much left for food and clothes. And no we do not have a flash car. We have a 12 year old people carrier which was the only thing that we could fit 3 child seats in the back of.
Yes we may have a house but no our children will not be able to go to university. And as I said we cannot rent as rents are higher and we cannot get housing benefit.

OP posts: